Pages

Friday, June 24, 2016

Royal News Special Report: Thoughts on Brexit

Yesterday, the people of the United Kingdom (or rather the people of England) voted to leave the European Union and reclaim the independence of Great Britain. I must admit, I did not think the British public had it in them any longer but, though it was narrower than I would have liked, the Brits have proven to be made of sterner stuff than I had been giving them credit for. In the face of opposition from basically the entire global ruling class, Britons voted to take back their sovereignty from the meddling bureaucrats and shadowy puppet-masters in Brussels. That is nothing short of historic and it is not because the European Union was some sort of major force in the world. It is basically a continental Ponzi scheme that has been struggling to survive even with extensive assistance. Rather, it is historic because the British voters chose to break with the narrative, to defy the internationalist ruling class of politicians and big business in Washington, London, Brussels and Peking. They defied the ruling class, showed two fingers to “the establishment” and did what all of those with power and influence and celebrity around the world told them NOT to do.

Now, from the monarchist perspective, this was the right decision regardless of the political or economic situation. The United Kingdom, as with any traditional monarchy, is supposed to have *one* sovereign, above which there is no higher, earthly authority. The Queen, represented in law by “the Crown”, is the embodiment of the nation and the source for all government authority. All law, authority and legitimacy comes from the Crown and as such there is to be nothing above the Crown. The Queen, as the embodiment of the nation, appoints the prime minister who governs the country and it is the powers of the Crown which the government exercises. Given all of that, the idea that the Westminster Parliament, the British courts and laws given legitimacy by the authority of the Queen could all be overruled by acts of the European Union is a disgraceful and disjointed state of affairs that any loyalist should have been repelled by on principle. U.K. membership in the E.U. was also a snubbing of the Queen’s other subjects from Canada to Australia in favor of others to which Britain has no ancestral, cultural or historical connection whatsoever. But the bottom line is that the government of Britain is supposed to be the Queen’s government and is supposed to answer to her and not to Brussels.

For myself, the most impressive thing about this outcome was the defiance of the global ruling class. All the celebrities in Britain backed “remain”, Tony Blair, Call Me Dave Cameron, all the leading political figures in Britain backed “remain”. The rulers of the EU of course warned Britain to “remain”, the Japanese wanted Britain to “remain” and President Obama even came to Britain and basically threatened people to vote “remain” and the British had the courage to defy all of these people, to reject their efforts to tell them what to do and also defied the elites of international finance. Yesterday, stocks on Wall Street were up, because everyone expected Britons to vote the way they had been told and this, in my opinion, was also an effort by the financial elites to effect the outcome. As the day went on and into the night (in America) it became clear that the “leave” vote was winning, stocks in Asia and futures in America started to fall. Japan actually shut down the Nikkei for a time for fear there would be a collapse. I don’t think this was based on rationality but rather was an outpouring of petulant anger by the leaders of the global economy for the British people defying their wishes and making things more difficult for them. I applaud Britain for showing these people that they are not as all-powerful as they thought they were.

I do not believe the economic consequences will be as bad as people think, or at least they do not need to be because nothing in Britain has changed and some things will likely get better but that all depends on policy going forward. If things do get worse it will be because the international economic elites are trying to punish Britain for their rejection of their domination. Germans are still going to want to sell goods to Britain and Britain has long had a trade imbalance with the rest of the EU. Likewise, Britain has long been in the top ten of countries that buys the most and sells the most to the United States and a 2015 survey found that 90% of Americans have a favorable view of the British. This vote will not change that just as it does not change the fact that the two biggest financial centers of the western world have long been New York and London. Some of the international finance elites may want to punish Britain for the vote, but people still want to make money so they are still going to want to do business with Great Britain and barring any radical, idiotic changes in policy, that is not going to change no matter what the hysterical people say. They are simply upset that their cozy set-up has been inconvenienced.

Again, what happens going forward will depend on the British government, the policies they pursue and what the British people decide going forward (such as in Scotland and Northern Ireland) but I think this is a great day and it offers up a great deal of new possibilities for the future of Great Britain. I would hope that Britain renews and strengthens economic and military ties with the Commonwealth, I would like to see a stronger relationship between the countries of the Anglosphere and I would hope that the whole rotten edifice of the EU will start to collapse. I would welcome an “exit” vote in The Netherlands and Denmark, I would like to see Spain withdraw and draw closer to Latin America. There are things I would like to see for other European countries but for most of them they need to get a traditional, legitimate form of government back as their first priority. After that, and there would in many cases have to be some pain as they face the reality of their economic situation and make the hard choices that have been put off for far too long but, after that, there are plenty of possibilities for things to get better. Many people have highlighted the similarity between “Brexit” supporters and the rise of Donald Trump in America. There is something to that in as far as nationalism versus globalism goes but I want all of these countries to be “great” again and they can be. We know they can be for the simple reason that they have been before and they didn’t need the European Union to make that happen.

13 comments:

This is a historical day. It is the beginning of the end of globalism for western countries & progressive leftism that's destroying western culture. My Dutch friend says there's a large chance next year there'll be a Dutch referendum. The anti-EU party is the most popular in the polls and they have elections next year. Combine that with a Trump presidency in the US and things might be alright in the future.

I don't understand why people are comparing this to Donald Trump's presidency, and I'm not convinced that it's morally okay to vote for him. I'm not sure I'm going to vote in the Presidential election at all, and if I do I'm not voting for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton for certain.

to vote does seem to make one morally complicit in the result of an election. Even if one votes against a politician by voting for another and your pick loses, you still accept that possibility and the result by voting at all. I don't know if I can stomach that moral taint anymore, now that I see things in that way. As an Orthodox Christian, I feel I'm bound to support a God-Anointed Sovereign, an Autocrat, a Czar.

Pair O'Dimes: I do not understand why anyone would have a moral objection to Donald Trump. Mr. Trump is the first national candidate to hit upon the real issues that are bringing America to its knees. As Mayor Ed Koch said, "If you agree with me on 8 of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree on 12 out of 12, see a psychiatrist". I would point out that a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Clinton.

@Charles: Your last sentence is a very common logical fallacy. Both sides make that exact claim--they can't both be right, by definition. A refusal to vote for either Trump or Hillary cannot possibly help both candidates at the same time.

Beware of committing idolatry, lest your idol fail to live up to your expectations.

@annatar1914: It isn't just a matter of being morally complicit in a possible result--it's a matter of supporting someone who intends to break his oath of office before he's made it, someone who both intends to use his office to commit grievous immoralities and subvert the foundational law. If the only candidates available fit that description, it's morally wrong to vote for any of them, even if there's a 99% chance that your candidate will lose.

I don't blame you for feeling as you do, and I'm happy if I've served as God's instrument in helping you. I'm Catholic, and I definitely would prefer an anointed King or Emperor to any politician, even if some politicians theoretically might be good (I'd vote for someone like Gabriel Garcia Moreno, but I have my doubts as to how many such candidates there are in the 2016 United States Presidential election).

I don't mind telling you that I actually strolled to work humming the national anthem and "Rule Brittania".

Being the young fogey that I am, I have attracted a large amount of vitriol on Facebook from my so-called "friends" who cannot understand why someone 23 years old should be voting to leave; but I stand by my reasoning.

500 years ago England left the Catholic Church. We cut ourselves off from the controls and rules of Rome and flourished - we were able to offer the best artisans, architects and other intelligencia freedoms that they couldn't find on the continent. Thus, we prospered and grew an Empire that spanned the globe.

That reasoning, along with my own leasure-research into history, politics, science and economics and so forth have been enough for me to have been prepared to vote "Leave" for many years now.

As a loyal subject of Her Majesty, I'm pleased as punch our island will be setting course for a sunnier future (though admittedly the dropping pound is a tad gloomy, but I expect it to be short-term).

It astounds me that your monarch, your legitimate head of state, is allowed no voice on the issues that confront your nation, yet 48% of your countrymen (more in Scotland and Ulster) have no problem with unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, as well as Mrs. Merkel, being able to determine your nation's future. HM gained her position in Britain legitimately through the time honored process of hereditary succession, Mrs. Merkel has no legitimate position to determine the course of any nation outside of Germany.

I was so sure the British would vote "remain", that I didn't even cool a bottle of Champagne... Hopefully this will be the beginning of the end of the EU. Nobody knows what will follow the EU, nobody claims it will be a land of milk and honey. But obviously we must not go on this way, since the EU is slowly choking to death the peoples of Europe.

I do worry about what this means for Scotland though. We all know that the left's way, when they don't get what they want through an election, is to treat the results of the election as illegitimate and push for another one - and keep pushing for as many elections as they need to finally get what they want, at which point the matter is considered settled for all eternity never to be revisited. It's why they used the results of the 1973 referendum on joining a simple free trade zone as proof forever that British people were totally OK with the EU turning into a massive federal super state with no further vote needed, but why the Scottish independence referendum was badly run and illegitimate and needs to be repeated ASAP. With every single constituency in Scotland voting in favor of remaining - the only part of the UK with a totally unanimous vote - even parts of Northern Ireland voted leave - it seems apparent that the Scottish government will not allow the rest of Britain to take them out of the EU without a fight of some sort.

On the plus side, Scotland is the most left wing part of the UK, and the traditional seat of power for socialist politicians, so with them out of the union, the rest of Britain would be free to follow a more conservative course that could see them on their way to reemerging as a major force in the world. On the downside, Britain's nuclear arsenal and what's left of their shipbuilding industry are in Scotland, and I do sincerely believe that Scotland, England, and the UK are all ultimately better off with Scotland in the UK than out of it.

It's just so depressing that, more than 300 years after the Act of Union, so little was done to cultivate any sense of a single British national identity or foster any sort of real cohesion between the two countries. There are failures on both sides there, and there's not much that can be done about it now.

The one hope is maybe some kind of delay tactics. Separating from the EU won't be finished until maybe 2019 at the earliest, and another independence referendum could be put off until that process is finalized, so that could give the pro-UK side 5 years or so to convince Scots of the logic of staying unified. The whole thing becomes much easier if the economic consequences to Britain for leaving the EU wind up being much less severe than the Remain side predicted, and, indeed, if the opposite happens and the country hits a major boom that lifts Scotland along with it.

I have heard that the Spanish government has said it will block any effort by an independent Scotland to join the EU or NATO, which would remove the point of Scotland becoming independent in the first place according to the SNP, because the Spanish don't want them setting an example for the Catalans.